Defined to the Fringes

Well, I guess I've been put in my place. Thanks to SciFiConventions.com, we now know that science fiction conventions are "A fun event for fans of Science fiction, fantasy & horror such as Star Trek, Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica or Star Wars!..."

Now, to their credit, their definitions of the major convention types aren't too badly off. They get some things right. They even list "literary" conventions (which in this case includes all sorts of what I'd call general cons like BayCon, etc., not just specialist events like Potlatch) first. But otherwise, I feel like I've been defined off to the fringes of the field and been told that written science fiction and its related interests are a minor, irrelevant interest compared to Real Science Fiction, which consists of watching television and movies.

I feel old.

Avalanche Racing

While driving to work this morning (25 minute delay at the normally-uncongested Dumbarton Bridge because a toll lane was closed, darnit), I had lots of time to think about why the (to over-simplify) "media" fan contingent is so down on events like Westercon, Worldcon, etc. and classes them as exclusively "literary" when I'm of the opinion that they are "general" or "mixed" events. ("Exclusively literary" is something I reserve for World Fantasy Con and Potlatch-like specialty events.) A sports analogy comes to mind. Of course, if you're completely indifferent to sports, this analogy won't work at all.

( Sanitized for the sports-allergic )

The analogy of "media" fans to "extreme sports" fans sounds workable to me, but maybe that's just the carbon monoxide fumes from the traffic backup talking.